Task 6: Material Thermal Input for Iowa Materials, May 2008

The present research project was designed to determine thermal properties, such as coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) and thermal conductivity, of Iowa concrete pavement materials. These properties are required as input values by the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG). In this project, a literature review was conducted to determine the factors that affect thermal properties of concrete and the existing prediction equations for CTE and thermal conductivity of concrete. CTE tests were performed on various lab and field samples of portland cement concrete (PCC) at the Iowa Department of Transportation and Iowa State University. The variations due to the test procedure, the equipment used, and the consistency of field batch materials were evaluated. The test results showed that the CTE variations due to test procedure and batch consistency were less than 5%, and the variation due to the different equipment was less than 15%. Concrete CTE values were significantly affected by different types of coarse aggregate. The CTE values of Iowa concrete made with limestone+graval, quartzite, dolomite, limestone+dolomite, and limestone were 7.27, 6.86, 6.68, 5.83, and 5.69 microstrain/oF (13.08, 12.35, 12.03, 10.50, and 10.25 microstrain/oC), respectively, which were all higher than the default value of 5.50 microstrain/oF in the MEPDG program. The thermal conductivity of a typical Iowa PCC mix and an asphalt cement concrete (ACC) mix (both with limestone as coarse aggregate) were tested at Concrete Technology Laboratory in Skokie, Illinois. The thermal conductivity was 0.77 Btu/hr•ft•oF (1.33 W/m•K) for PCC and 1.21 Btu/hr•ft•oF (2.09 W/m•K) for ACC, which are different from the default values (1.25 Btu/hr•ft•oF or 2.16 W/m•K for PCC and 0.67 Btu/hr•ft•oF or 1.16 W/m•K for ACC) in the MEPDG program. The investigations onto the CTE of ACC and the effects of concrete materials (such as cementitious material and aggregate types) and mix proportions on concrete thermal conductivity are recommended to be considered in future studies.

MEPDG Work Plan Task No. 7: Existing Pavement Input Information for the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide, 2009

The objective of this study is to systematically evaluate the Iowa Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s) existing Pavement Management Information System (PMIS) with respect to the input information required for Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) rehabilitation analysis and design. To accomplish this objective, all of available PMIS data for interstate and primary roads in Iowa were retrieved from the Iowa DOT PMIS. The retrieved data were evaluated with respect to the input requirements and outputs for the latest version of the MEPDG software (version 1.0). The input parameters that are required for MEPDG HMA rehabilitation design, but currently unavailable in the Iowa DOT PMIS were identified. The differences in the specific measurement metrics used and their units for some of the pavement performance measures between the Iowa DOT PMIS and MEPDG were identified and discussed. Based on the results of this study, it is recommended that the Iowa DOT PMIS should be updated, if possible, to include the identified parameters that are currently unavailable, but are required for MEPDG rehabilitation design. Similarly, the measurement units of distress survey results in the Iowa DOT PMIS should be revised to correspond to those of MEPDG performance predictions. *******************Large File**************************

Taxing Sweets: Sweetener Input Tax or Final Consumption Tax?

In order to reduce obesity and associated costs, policymakers are considering various policies, including taxes, to change consumers high-calorie consumption habits. We investigate two tax policies aimed at reducing added sweetener consumption. Both a consumption tax on sweet goods and a sweetener input tax can reach the same policy target of reducing added sweetener consumption. Both tax instruments are regressive, but the associated surplus losses are limited. The tax on sweetener inputs targets sweeteners directly and causes about five times less surplus loss than the final consumption tax. Previous analyses have overlooked this important point.